The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1887-05-06
LEE AND GRANT AND SHERMAN.

|
he is a born writer. Fighting, speaking or
writing he is always equal to the oscasion,
and always makes clean job of it. His last
work in the writing line is in the North
American Review for May, where, under the
title of Grant, Thomas, Lee" he replies to
General Lord Wolseley's article in Macmil-
lans Magazine for March. General Sher-
mans article is a splendid vindication of the
truth of American history and crushing re-
ply to General Wolseley. To use vulgar
but expressive phrase, he wipes the ground"
with Wolseley, though. for that matter, he
could perform the same service for much
greater man. General Wolseley's article was
a review of the memoirs of Robert f. Lee"
and, with assumption of professional fair
ness and impartiality, was a one-sided eulogy
of the confederate general The concluding
sentences of his article furnished the key
note. He said:
When all the angry feelings reused by Sc
cession are buried with those which existed
when the Declaration of Independence
written, when Americans can review the his
/ tory of their last great rebellion with calm
impartiality. l believe all will admit General
Lee lowered far above all men on either side
| in that struggle. | believe he will be regarded.
not only rs the most prominent figure of the
| Confederacy but as the great American of
| the nineteenth century, whose statue is well
worthy to stand on an equal pedestal with
| that of Washington, and whose memory is
| equally worthy to be enshrined in the hearts
| of all his countrvmen"
| To this General Sherman says that, as he
happens to be of the survivors of the
civil war who had personal and professional
sides, he may venture to express opinion
on the subject Then follows a paragraph
which contains the keynote of his article
and in some sense of his character, too This
is it:
England has long been accustomed to
shape and mold the public opinion of our
race, that her authors, critics and officials
seem to forget that times changing, have
changed. The United Kingdom of Great
Britain and Ireland contained in 1880 only
thirty-six millions of inhabitants, with an
area of 121,57l square miles, whereas the
United States of America had fifty millions
of people, with 1902, 900 square miles of ter
ritory. Great Britain is crowded, whereas in
our vast interior there still remains land
enough for three hundred millions of inhab-
itants. All of these are taught the English
language, believe in the Bible, Shakespeare,
Milton, Walter Scott, Dickens, Thackeray
and Tennyson; all read English magazines,
periodicals and newspapers, and have a way
of thinking for themselves. They have had
twenty-one years for thought and reflection
since the smoke and confusion of battle OBJ
secured the horizon. and have settled down to
the conclusion that Abraham Lincoln the
great civil hero of the war. and that Ulysses
S. Grant the chief military heseo."
patriotism, and wthal, note the ungrudging
and generous award of superiority which one
great soldier makes to another. General
Sherman is American of the Amer
icans thoroughly patriotic and loyal to
the backbone. Observe how nicely he adjusts
the focus to give the United States its proper
place, and the judgment of the American
people its proper weight. A few pages are
given to correcting General Wolseleys error
in comparing the of the rebellion with
the war of the revolution-a comparison
which General Sherman shows had not a sim
gle point of support. Then he relates the
circumstances of Lees resignation from the
United States army to take command of ''the
points out the singular fact that it is still
doubtful if he ever took the oath of allegiance
to the Confederacy. 1t is shown that for the
most part Lee fought on Virginia soil, in de-
Tense of Virginia alone. only twice, at Ante
tam and Gettysburg, assuming the
offensive. 'In the first instance" says
Sherman, "he knew personally his antagonist,
and that large fraction of his force would be
held in reserve; in the last, he assumed the
bold offensive was badly beaten by Meade,
and forced to retreat back to Virginia As
an aggressive soldier Lee not success,
and in war that is the true and proper test"
General Sherman admits that Lee had some
admirable traits of character but he adds,
$50 long the public record tells of Z. S.
Grant and George II. Thomas, we cannot be at
loss for heroes for whom to erect monu-
ments like those of Nelson and Wellington, in
London, well worthy to stand side by side
with the one which now graces our capital
city of George Washington" General Sher-
man then turns to sketch the career of the
man who, in 1861, when General Lee was a
colonel of cavalry, was IAN humble citizen of
Galena, ILL.,, toiling to support his family"
He follows him from his entrance into the
service, through his early successes, till ne
was called to Washington and to the command
of all the armies of the Union. Then, says
Sherman, casting his thoughts over CONT
ncnt, giving minute instructions for several
distinct armies from the Potomac to the Rio
Grande, himself assuming the hardest share,
he began campaign equal in strategy, in
logistics and in tactics to any of Napoleon,
and grander than any ever contemplated by
England" Without following his military
career in detail it is outlined by few master
Oh hon hot ,l,od